Tuesday, March 02, 2010

Our Ukraine along with Bloc Lytyn have once again proved that they are not trustworthy coalition partners and that they will gravitate to the powers that be The stage has been set for a vote of no confidence in the government on March 3, 2010. If a motion is passed then the fuse will be lite and the countdown will begin. Ukraine's parliament will have on month in which to decide will they face the people of Ukraine and hold a fresh round, the third in as four years, of parliamentary elections.

Yanukovych's ultimatum "form a new government or face elections"

Under the provisions of Ukraine's Constitution (Article 83) a governing coalition must be formed with the support of factions (not individuals) representing a majority of members of Parliament within 30 days and they will 60 days to form a new cabinet. With the passing of a vote of no coincidence the existing cabinet will be deemed to have resigned but they are entitled to remain in office until a new government is appointed and approved by the President of Ukraine. Viktor Yanukovych is not obliged to dismiss Ukraine's Parliament once the expiration date for the trigger has elapsed but he in the passing of these dates the President will have considerable greater authority to apply pressure on the existing parliamentary to support a new governing coalition with party of Regions.

If fresh Parliamentary elections were held during the first round of presidential elections Sergei Tigipko would hold the balance of power. Bloc Lytvyn would lose representation and Our Ukraine-Peoples' Self Defense would no longer exist with Our Ukraine is fracturing into two or more parts. Arseniy Yatsenyuk would lead the forth highest political faction. Peoples Self defense have already declared that they will move into opposition with Bloc Tymoshenko should Party of Regions move into government.

The threat of a new parliamentary election is a strong incentive for Lytvyn to go with the flow, what ever direction pressure is applied. All indications are he will do just that. Lytvyn will vote to support a new governing coalition. The problem being that once a vote of no confidence is passed there is no turning back, the horse trading will be on on in all seriousness.

Much will depend on how the our Ukraine-Peoples' Self Defense faction as a whole will vote. They are not a united faction and a majority of its members will have to decide who to support Tymoshenko or Party of Regions.

The formation of a new government might buy more time but the inevitable need to hold fresh elections will eventually win out. Our Ukraine will begin to lose public support and a large percentage of their support base will gravitate to Tymoshenko who will then be in opposition. Eventually Our Ukraine and party of regions will fall out and an impasse on policy and direction will see Our Ukraine once again take an opposing point of view. Party of Regions will have noting to fear from fresh elections, the main losers will be Lytvn and Our Ukraine.

Waiting in the wings of course is Sergei Tigipko who if elections are held sooner than then later will be main benefactor and who will most likely hold the balance of power and be in a position to decide who will be in government. Party of Regions will consider Tikipko a more stable coalition partner something that both Party of Regions and Tigipko can play off in a parliamentary campaign.

Bloc Tymoshenko, assuming it will remain united faced with moving into opposition, can also decide to force parliamentary elections should Our Ukraine support a coalition with Party of Regions. Bloc Tymoshenko, as they did in 2007, can resign their mandate and cancel their election list at a time of their choosing. But this also has some risk s as it also work against them as Ukraine begins to tire of the constant political round Robbin of elections. Tymoshenko would become the focus of voter resentment but so too could Party of regions and all other political parties except Tigipko and Yanteniuk.

Party of regions holds all the trump cards the only thing missing is a constitutional majority. The President of Ukraine still holds considerable power, the power of veto, the right to make presidential declarations and authority to dismiss Ukraine's Parliament should it be deemed necessary,

A third alternative, but more remote, is the formation of a constitutional majority coalition between Bloc Tymoshenko and Party of Regions. If Bloc Tymoschenko and Party of Regions were able to return to the negotiating table and form a governing coalition of unity then opportunity could exist to reform Ukraine's Constitution and system of governance. Ukraine could become a full parliamentary system of governance. This is unlikely to happen now that Yanukovych has been elected President, Party of Regions let alone Yanukovych will not give up power no that they have won it - even if it is in Ukraine's best long term interest.

As long as Ukraine remains divided it will sadly continue to ride the roller-coaster of political instability and power struggle between the office of the president and the people's parliamentary representatives.

1 Comment:

hey there! I didn't find a contact form, so I've decided to write here :)you have a great page!my name is Andriy. I am Ukrainian. I live and study in Portugal. I am admin of a blog about Ukraine in Portuguese language "Ucrânia Online" http://ucraniaonline.blogspot.comI'm interested in link exchange

News in review

Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe (PACE) Explanatory Report calls on Ukraine to adopt a Full Parliamentary System in line with other European States

"It would be better for the country to switch to a full parliamentary system with proper checks and balances and guarantees of parliamentary opposition and competition."

Constitutional Court challenge

The authority of the President to dismiss Ukraine's parliament has been challenged in Ukraine's Constitutional Court amidst concern that the President's actions are unconstitutional in that he has exceeded his authority to dismiss Ukraine's parliament.

On April 19 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe passed a resolution in consideration of a report titled Functioning of democratic institutions in Ukraine. (Items 13 and 14) stated:

“ The Assembly deplores the fact that the judicial system of Ukraine has been systematically misused by other branches of power and that top officials do not execute the courts’ decisions, which is a sign of erosion of this crucial democratic institution. An independent and impartial judiciary is a precondition for the existence of a democratic society governed by the rule of law. Hence the urgent necessity to carry out comprehensive judicial reform, including through amendments to the constitution.

The Assembly reiterates that the authority of the sole body responsible for constitutional justice – the Constitutional Court of Ukraine – should be guaranteed and respected. Any form of pressure on the judges is intolerable and should be investigated and criminally prosecuted. On the other hand, it is regrettable that in the eight months of its new full composition, the Constitutional Court has failed to produce judgments, thus failing to fulfil its constitutional role and to contribute to resolving the crisis in its earlier stages, which undermines the credibility of the court.

There is an urgent need for all pending judgments, and in particular the judgment concerning the constitutionality of the Presidential Decree of 2 April 2007, to be delivered. If delivered, the latter should be accepted as binding by all sides.
”

The associated explanatory report under the sub-heading of Pressure on the courts expressed concern that "Several local courts have made decisions to suspend the Presidential Decree only to then withdraw them, allegedly under pressure from the presidential secretariat." (item 67)

In emphasis the report (item 68) stated

"This is a worrying tendency of legal nihilism that should not be tolerated. It is as clear as day that in a state governed by the rule of law judicial mistakes should be corrected through appeal procedures and not through threats or disciplinary sanctions ”

On April 30, on the eve of the Constitutional Court's ruling on the legality of the president's decree dismissing Ukraine's parliament, President Yushchenko, in defiance of the PACE resolution of April 19 intervened in the operation of Ukraine's Constitutional Court by summarily dismissing two Constitutional Court Judges, Syuzanna Stanik and Valeriy Pshenychnyy, for allegations of "oath treason." His move was later overturned by the Constitutional Court and the judges were returned by a temporary restraining order issued by the court.

Following the president's intervention the Constitutional Court still has not ruled on the question of legality of the president's actions.

Stepan Havrsh, the President's appointee to the Constitutional Court, in prejudgment of the courts decision and without authorization from the Court itself, commented in an interview published on July 24

“ I cannot imagine myself as the Constitutional Court in condition in which three political leaders signed a political/legal agreement on holding early elections, which also stipulates the constitutional basis for holding the elections... How the court can agree to consider such a petition under such conditions.”

Olexander Lavrynovych, Ukrainian Minister for Justice, in an interview published on Aug 3 is quoted as saying

“ According to the standards of the Constitution and the laws of Ukraine, these elections should have been recognized invalid already today. But we understand that we speak about the State and about what will happen further in this country. As we've understood, political agreements substitute for the law, ... The situation has been led to the limit, where there are no possibilities to follow all legal norms.